I've used SqLite on a few occasions. Depending on what you need to do it works very well.

SqLite is very dependent on proper configuration to get good performance out of it. Default config is pretty slow... but with turning off the transaction log (journal) and in memory usage it can do OK.

It works great as a single user Db, but make sure you don't need multi-user access in the future because it's terrible for that - basically locking the entire db for any updates which is very inefficient.

+++ Rick ---



>Hi all,
>
>I am starting the rewrite of a VFP-based application. The UI is still undecided but the glue language for the application is: that's python.
>
>An essential key of the success of this rewrite: the ability to translate a decent part of the current application logic. Since the current VFP app makes a very significant use of VFP temp indexed cursors massaging data with a mix of both SQL and non-sql VFP operations, I definitely want to find a robust alternative to VFP cursors within the python eco-system.
>
>On the paper, current SQLITE has everything that fits the bill to replace VFP cursor operations including a great "in-memory" mode, UDFs and a lot more. For those among you who have an experience in SQLITE, I'd be glad to get your feelings on their respective merits in terms of local temp storage.
>
>I am especially interested by the performance level that I can expect with "in-memory" application-level data stores in view of rushmore-optimized VFP operations we are all used to and, as far as I am concerned, always amazed, even in 2015...
>
>Regards to all of you
>
>Daniel